Literature DB >> 25423298

Perioperative Outcome Comparisons Between Open and Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy Among a Population-Based Cohort from 2010 to 2012.

Toru Sugihara1,2, Hideo Yasunaga3, Changhong Yu1, Hiromasa Horiguchi4, Hiroaki Nishimatsu2, Kiyohide Fushimi5, Michael W Kattan1, Yukio Homma2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the perioperative outcomes and costs between open and laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for malignant diseases on a contemporary population-based level. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Based on the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database for 2010 to 2012, we compared six end points of in-hospital mortality, intraoperative and postoperative complications, transfusion, anesthesia time, postoperative length of stay, and costs between open and laparoscopic nephroureterectomy under one-to-one matching based on the propensity scores. Multivariate analyses included sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, body mass index, oncologic stage, hospital volume, and hospital academic status. Missing values were filled in by five-copy multiple imputations.
RESULTS: Among 3595 open and 3349 laparoscopic nephroureterectomies, an average of 2902 matched pairs were generated by the imputation and matching process. The outcomes showing significantly favorable association with the laparoscopic approach over the open approach were in-hospital mortality (0.3% vs 0.7%; odds ratio [OR], 0.41 [95% confidence interval, CI, 0.17 to 0.99]), postoperative complications (9.4% vs 12.6%; OR, 0.73 [0.58 to 0.91]), transfusion (12.9% vs 20.6%; OR, 0.54 [0.46 to 0.64]), postoperative length of stay (median, 11 vs 12 days; Beta, -0.041 [-0.059 to -0.023]), and costs without the operating room (median, $6607 vs $7077; Beta, -0.030 [-0.048 to -0.013]), while significantly longer anesthesia time (median, 278 vs 245 min; Beta, 0.057 [0.041 to 0.074]) and higher total costs (median, $15691 vs $12846; Beta, 0.078 [0.068 to 0.088]) for laparoscopic than for open nephroureterectomies were noted. There was no difference in intraoperative complications (P=0.774).
CONCLUSION: Several favorable perioperative outcomes including low mortality were observed in laparoscopic nephroureterectomy compared with open nephroureterectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25423298     DOI: 10.1089/end.2014.0428

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  6 in total

Review 1.  Complications Following Radical Nephroureterectomy.

Authors:  Jay D Raman; Syed M Jafri
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy is associated with worse survival outcomes than open radical nephroureterectomy in patients with locally advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Hyung Suk Kim; Ja Hyeon Ku; Chang Wook Jeong; Cheol Kwak; Hyeon Hoe Kim
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-10-23       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy in the management of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a matched-pair comparison based on perioperative outcomes.

Authors:  Wentao Liu; Yinhuai Wang; Zhaohui Zhong; Hongyi Jiang; Shifeng Ouyang; Liang Zhu; Ran Xu
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Does lymph node dissection during nephroureterectomy affect oncological outcomes in upper tract urothelial carcinoma patients without suspicious lymph node metastasis on preoperative imaging studies?

Authors:  Sangjun Yoo; Dalsan You; In Gab Jeong; Bumsik Hong; Jun Hyuk Hong; Hanjong Ahn; Choung-Soo Kim
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-08-08       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Perioperative complications and adverse sequelae of radical nephroureterectomy.

Authors:  Alison Levy; David Canes
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-08

Review 6.  Oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open nephroureterectomy for the treatment of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis.

Authors:  Radosław Piszczek; Łukasz Nowak; Wojciech Krajewski; Joanna Chorbińska; Sławomir Poletajew; Marco Moschini; Krzysztof Kaliszewski; Romuald Zdrojowy
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 2.754

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.